Sydney airport to get $500 million upgrade

[Homer]

From: Sydney airport to get $500 million upgrade - News - Travel - smh.com.au

Linton Besser
October 16, 2007 - 1:49PM

A $500 million upgrade of Sydney Airport will boost the number of shops and food outlets, and centralise international security screening as passenger numbers through the airport double within 16 years.

But the upgrade could also lift the price of airline fares, as the costs of the upgrade are passed on to the airlines that service the airport.

 

[simongr]

Hmm - as a premium pax all I can see from this "upgrade" is massive disruption during the build, higher fares and no long term benefit...

 

[NM]

... higher fares and no long term benefit...

Nahh, the fares will stay the same. but the "Passenger Services Upgrade Surcharge" will double each year .

 

[Mal]

I am often very cynical, so I do apologise in advance for this latest cynical round

"will boost the number of shops and food outlets"

Aaah I see that Sydney Airport has learnt from London Heathrow. Build more shops and eating places. Don't really worry about passengers - they are merely a side effect of making money from rent on shops. Keep increasing passenger movement charges (yep, the passengers should be paying for the additional shopping and eating choices).

 

[moa999]

Looks like they are centralising outgoing immigration and security.

But no mention of doing anything to the incoming customs and immigration which imho is the worst part of SYD

 

[simongr]

Just reflecting on this a little - I am a premium passnger of the airline rather than the airport and given that I never spend any money outbound at SYD I am in fact a less than economy pax so why would they do anything for me?

 

[clifford]

I am often very cynical, so I do apologise in advance for this latest cynical round

"will boost the number of shops and food outlets"

Aaah I see that Sydney Airport has learnt from London Heathrow. Build more shops and eating places. Don't really worry about passengers - they are merely a side effect of making money from rent on shops. Keep increasing passenger movement charges (yep, the passengers should be paying for the additional shopping and eating choices).

Yes but SYD hasn't yet sunk to the depths that LHR has.

Most of the "duty free" outlets at LHR are owned by Ferrovial, the Spanish owners of LHR.

Food for thought...

 

[JohnK]

If I want to go shopping I go to a shopping centre not an airport....

 

[simongr]

But JohnK you are lucky enoug not to have sit in the airport for hours with nothing to do. You can arrive later, avoid queues and go straight to the lounge. It is the poor proles that have nothing to do so maybe this is a good thing...

 

[Homer]

I dislike the Macquarie-controlled SYD airport experience as much as the next guy, but there is more in this. The Herald focused on the headline number and the expanded shopping but there is also a new "outbound and early baggage handling system", "three new arrivals level baggage reclaim carousels", "additional and upgraded aeronautical facilities including aerobridges and taxiway improvements" and "the arrivals baggage system will...be upgraded." Source: Media Centre

If that means Mascot is bigger and better then I'm all for it.

 

[codash1099]

What other business is able to apply a special levy to its customers to finance its own expansion? Most business expansions are driven by an increase in business, which is in itself profit creating.

We are seeing here the worst possible effect of a monopoly. (Not that it would have been any better under Government control).

 

[ethernet]

Arrhh 'it should pass the 'whats in it for me test'
1) Quicker entry and exit or get in and get out times?
2) Cheaper, lower per pax charges ?
3) Shorter walking distances - not putting customs on the outer edge?
4) Cheaper shops / more competition?
5) Effficiency dividends (airlines pay less for everything).

If it can't do any of those, then I am not interested.

Dont want a strategic upgrade, ie QF expanded, shops and lounges planted, so any new entrant has to get the 800 metre extra walk far flung coughpola terminal, and a 25 year lease, so the airport cannot say, oh, we cant do anything about that...

In principle, no passenger should be disadvantaged, and any fees set inversley proportianal to metres walked for 1 complete return journey.
I'm sure some wicked person is working out how 'marathon' courses can be built in, and how the incumberants can be leaned on to 'pony up a co-payment' that guarantees new entrants get shafted before a sod it turned.

 

[simongr]

In principle, no passenger should be disadvantaged, and any fees set inversley proportianal to metres walked for 1 complete return journey.

Funniest post ever. It was a joke yeah - otherwise just plain stupid.